6 Responses

  1. RGGale
    RGGale at |

    The Company and the sUAL MEC have had a nasty relationship for as long as I’ve been following the industry. sUAL employees have never been happy and have always relied on their Union Reps to argue the company rather than logically and amicably meet mutual goals and resolutions. The sUAL MEC is just p!ssed that the sCAL MEC and the Company have a better relationship that makes sense for both the Union and the Company, where they don’t support cutting noses in spite of faces.

    Good for those sUAL furloughs who have an opportunity to keep their pay and other bennies except for seniority. That sucks, but it beats being out of a job. Anyone who rejects the sCAL offer either didn’t want to be employed as a flight attendant anymore for a variety of personal reasons, or is a moron.

    One thing to note, Seth, is that the letter to sUAL MEC is written by Sam Risoldi, while the new letter to sCAL MEC confirming the crossover deal was written by P. Douglas McKeen.

  2. Carl
    Carl at |

    Wasn’t there an election and there was supposed to be one union representing all the flight attendants? I know they haven’t negotiated a joint contract yet, but do both former unions (or union factions) remain around until they reach that joint contract?

    It is pretty pathetic that they have been negotiating for over a year and haven’t been able to agree to a joint contract. I won’t claim that I even begin to understand the differences in the terms of the contracts nor the internal union politics, but it seems to me that it weakens the bargaining position of the flight attendants not to be able to take a unified stance, and the company will of course take advantage of that.

    I believe that the sCO contract was more favorable for the company, particularly as regards work rules and benefits. If there is a unified union, wouldn’t it behoove them to get to a contract instead of letting time drag on, and the sCO side get larger and larger?

    Anyway, unhappy employees are not a good thing for customers, but then again neither is a non-competitive contract. Seems like the company has the leverage and the union hasn’t figured out a viable negotiating position or is overplaying their hand.